Last week's poll: the right route to HS2?

HS2 chair David Higgins has proposed speeding up the construction of the northern section of the controversial rail network, building a new hub at Crewe, and scrapping the HS2 - HS1 link. With which of the following statements do you most closely agree?

The anti-HS2 lobby were out in force among the 754 respondents to last week’s poll, with a clear majority — 55 per cent — saying that the scheme in an unnecessary waste of money and should be scrapped. The next largest group, 19 per cent, thought David Higgins’ proposals didn’t fast-track the Northern sections of the line enough, while 17 per cent thought the proposals did not address the country’s transport needs. Only 5 per cent thought the proposals address the concerns about HS2, while 3 per cent couldn’t pick one of our options.

HS2 is an unnecessary waste of money. The money could be better spent on improving the current rail infrastructure at fraction of the cost.High speed rails have failed in some countries due to highter ticket costs. Most people will travel in slower train if they save on ticket price.Also the projected figures of # of people travelling in HS2 is unrealistic. You will never fill the trains -very ambitious but unrealistic passenger #s.HS2 is a white elephant that should be scrapped.Anil

If the project commenced from Leeds only and the infrastructure between Northern Cities were significantly improved, then I could start to support the project.All HS2 does in its current form is to increase investment into London and starve the regions of much needed investment.I would feel much better if we were assured that there will be enough electricity available to power our factories in the future by UK based investment in Nuclear Power and Fracking.

HS2 will be damaging rather than beneficial to communities - and to commuters. The environmental impact has not been given full consideration or care (the devastation and destruction to wildlife around the historical village of Wendover being just one example). The effect the building of HS2 would have on communities, including housing, noise pollution, and destruction of whole residential areas has also been ill considered. Moreover, the building of the line does not benefit the areas of the UK that are so lacking in adequate transport - because it serves to benefit only existing rail links at an ever slightly faster rate. Also, it will have an adverse effect on daily London commuters in the Euston area in particular - with the lessening of platforms and lessening of running of non-high speed trains. It is not a fair distribution of money/transport improvements. It is a squander of public money, especially in times of severe public welfare need.

David Higgins has shown the huge benefit for UK transport infrastructure by co-coordinating network rail infrastructure spend and HS2. I only wish the Northern sections could be built at the same time as the southern sections. We need to get this project under-way asap and finish it asap. David Higgins is the right man to deliver this project ahead of time and on budget, thinking 50 years ahead might be a first for the UK but at least we are now doing it with HS2 and Network Rail.

HS2 is unnecessary, a colossal waste of our money, and a vanity project for politicians. It is also a threat to wildlife more of our green fields and has already seriously blighted the lives of all those who live along its proposed route. Better to spend some money upgrading what already exists

The thinking is muddled. First define the problem. Is it capacity or is it journey times? HS2 started out as a showcase project to reduce journey times to Birmingham and was justified on the basis that all business travel time was non-productive. When that was shown to be flawed, the justification was switched to capacity, but as others have pointed out, it will actually reduce capacity in respect of commuters to Euston who need non HS trains. As Homer would say - Doh!

I agree with the final statement "None of the above". It is an absurd project; a complete waste of taxpayers' money which would be better spent on the NHS, education and proper care of the sick and elderly.

I agree with statement 4, in that it does not justify the cost which has been calculated by people with a vested interest.If it thought to be such a good deal why not leave it to the private sector to invest.Better to spend the money on nuclear power instead of giving future income from the power industry to foreign investors.We all need power but have a choice with UK internal transport.

The fundamental problem with the HS2 project is that we decided that we want High Speed Rail and we set out to justify that "want". This is sadly typical of politically-driven projects. In engineering we start by defining the problem in an honest and objective way. Only then do we try to find solutions which address the problem. The correct thing to do would be to re-evaluate the whole project by defining the problem first. Unfortunately there are too many vested interests and too much political face to be lost for that to happen. If all large public projects were re-evaluated 10 years on to see to what extent they meet the figures used to justify them we would get some big surprises. Try doing this for HS1 or the M6Toll for example. Politicians think that we all have very short memories and, to a large extent, they are right!

I agree with the statement that HS2 is an unnecessary waste of money, more importantly tax payers money!The objectives changed frequently, but it won't benefit the communities who need it most, sucking investment into London. It's a regressive tax paid for by millions and will be used by a minority In addition there is no (as yet) compensation for those who have their house prices adversely effected by the infrastructure project, again why should they pay for this project?

HS2 is a complete waste of money, and will be a white elephant. Why the continued emphasis on London - its the last place many many people want to go to. Not one person i know is in favour of this ridiculous scheme. Another example of the politicians being totally out of touch with those they are supposed to represent

This is a vanity project superimposed on a network in need of investment. It is anything but the integrated transport system that this country needs. It will do nothing for connectivity and not provide capacity where it is needed. Scrap it now and upgrade the existing network and improve local commuter services. Not sexy but practical and cost effective.

I believe HS2 is an unnecessary project which has no cost/benefit justification and will simply waste money and irreparably damage this country. The existing overall rail network can be improved at a lower cost and with a genuine benefit to the whole country and economy.

HS2 will end up pulling more finance and people into London and the South East and will undermine the existing rail network rather than enhance it while causing unavoidable environmental and social damage and upheaval. It would be better to upgrade the existing Midland Mainline (which already forms the basis for a 'Y-shaped network') to high speed from London to Sheffield, have spurs to the centres deemed critical for the current HS2 plan, improve the capacity and standard of the existing East and West Coast lines, and connect those lines to the more central high speed line branching from Sheffield.

I agree with the statement that HS2 is an unnecessary waste of money. We already have a service from London to Birmingham - why not upgrade the current system. Spend the money on linking the main cities in the north and improving the infrastructure in this area. This is where the money should be spent.

1. HS2's speed-first route risks making Birmingham and Birmingham airport part of the mega-London economy: bad for the North South Divide2. Speed-first to Birmingham then needs one fork to Manchester and one to Leeds, but:3. Neither fork meets the North’s priority for a fast-link between these two centres.4. HS2 avoids East Midlands Airport: that region’s potential growth driver.5. HS2’s trains are extra power-hungry and need bespoke stations.6. And, Euston has access penalties for south of London and east of City users.

This alternative aims to meet these shortcomings:

http://hsnorthstart.wordpress....

From the outset, the Northern Cities Crossrail would refresh parts that HS2 will not. Critiques welcome.

HS2 fails to address the future needs for transport. The construction will devastate lives worse than the recent floods have .It has been proved that existing classic network can deliver the same passenger numbers as HS2 at a fraction of the cost and can be delivered now not in 15 years.

I'm marginally in favour of HS2 but only if the full system through to Manchester and Leeds is constructed at the same time as the London - Birmingham section. I had also assumed that there would be a connection to HS1. Yesterday's announcement that there won't be a connection, and hence no through trains to Europe other than from London and the South East, is something of a game changer in my eyes. HS2 will only serve to grow London.

ed-" you can always vote". Yes, this fiasco was started by the Labour Party, so that's going to work. "The Engineer" has become blatantly pro-Labour in recent months-in our office it's known as "The Industry Mirror", so such a comment while dangerous, is, I suppose, expected.

Lets face the stark realities here, it is nothing more than a vanity project to benefit London and condemn the rest of the country.

We currently have an over populated London commuter belt with burgeoning services which cannot cope. Roads are overloaded, water is rationed every summer, and electrical, gas, and sewage services are overloaded or near capacity. When a property such as a normal 1930's house is for sale it is bought by a property developer who knocks it down and builds a small apartment complex. Instead of one family occupying the plot we now have multiple families occupying the same space.

What is the solution? increase the size of the commuter belt and bring in workers from outside the traditional commuter belt with their high cost of living. Workers come in from the South Midlands and demand lower wages so London companies benefit again and local employers paying lower salaries lose out. Now another skills shortage as they go to London for higher salaries.